Archive for October, 2008

“Portraits”

Posted by jvanb on October 25th, 2008

jay and portrait
If you teleport into Brooklyn is Watching right now, you receive a special gift from Selavy Oh, its called a portrait, and its a white, glowing, rectangular prism. It comes with a note card like this:

Dear Owner,

Congratulations! You are now the owner of an original artwork by Selavy Oh.
This object is a unique portrait of yourself, an accurate rendering of your “bounding box”, your physical appearance in Second Life.
You may give it to others, but it will remain your portrait.
But be aware that this is an original, uniquely created for you by Selavy Oh.
You will not receive a second version of this artwork.

Sincerely,

Selavy Oh, October 2008

This is a fun one. I don’t love it as much as some of the things that Selavy has done here, like the chain:

which was my favorite thing so far because of its simplicity and beauty and the poetry of a chain suspended from nothing that is destroyed by a flaw in the world and then rebuilds itself.

But The portraits have humor going for them.

November 1st- Physical Virtuality at Brooklyn is Watching

Posted by jvanb on October 25th, 2008



Next Saturday there’s going to be a very special treat at BIW thanks to dutch artist Sander Veenhof. Physcial Virtuality will allow visitors to BIW’s space on the Popcha sim (see teleport now button on left side of this page) to “balance” virtually with visitors to the Nemo Science Center in Amsterdam. The real people in A’dam will be standing on some kind of crazy computer-controlled hydraulic platform that will move up and down based on the calculated “weight” of the avatars standing on a virtual platform at Brooklyn is Watching. So basically it’ll be like a teeter-totter but with one end in Second Life and the other in Holland. This seems like a really fun chance to make some random dutch people fall down. No, seriously, we’ll be nice –we are talking about the land of my ancestors after all, they’re good folks — I think it will be a fun way to engage in “play” between avatars and humans. I hope y’all can come!

saturday 1st of november 2008

18:00 - 1:00 GMT
2pm - 8:00pm Eastern Standard Time
11:00am - 5:00pm SLT

Brooklyn is Watching Podcast 32

Posted by jvanb on October 25th, 2008

ok, everyone sorry for the delay, but its worth it, i think cause this is a good one.

you can download it directly here

Or get it from iTunes

and also there is Feedburner

Episode 32: Just Like A Birthday Clown

In Episode 32, We have a good panel of old hands talking over skype with good sound quality and fairly sound minds at work. We discover that Boris is getting in the press as a viral marketing expert, that Jay is like a clown, that Patrick is a HUGE star trek dork (or former one at the very least) and the Karl Linden was responsible for creating sculpty prims. The word “ennui” is used and a discussion of floating purple rectangles turns into a discussion of existentialism. We all had a really good time recording this podcast, and I hope you all have as much fun listening to it. or more!

Panel includes: Jay, Boris, Patrick Lichty, Beth Harris, and Karl Stiefvater.

Artists discussed: Bryn Oh, Lucian Iwish, Man Machinaga, DC Spensley

Images from the podcast are here

Learning from Los Vegas

Posted by Fitz on October 23rd, 2008

I’m joining the conversation a few days late, but I was just perusing the thread of comments to the “BIW – Podcast 31” post, and was struck by some of the topics exchanged. On the one hand, there seems to be a war of the worlds—between the art of SL and of the material world. On the other, there is a call for “remediation” and “translation” between them.

Why can’t the art just stand on its own as art? Why must it be prefaced by the modifier “SL” or “material” at all?

A note of clarification: My discussion of “context” in a previous post (which was not my word, but was quoted from Jay’s comments in the Podcast) seems to have been conflated with my discussion of “antecedents.” By antecedent, I did not mean “precedent.” As my old philosophy professor used to argue, we are living in a world of infinite proliferation of signs; frankly, it would be hard to prove definitively any lack of precedents, that something had not been done before, or that no allusions were at stake.

In grammar, an antecedent is most often the noun (or phrase) that is referred to later on in a sentence by a pronoun. It has nothing to do with volition or creation; the antecedent did not somehow make room for the emergence of the pronoun which followed it. The pronoun is only as good as its antecedent. It (the pronoun) simply offers a way to limit redundancy, to increase linguistic efficiency; but in all accounts it should be able to be directly switched at any moment by its antecedent with no change in meaning at all. When people choose poor pronouns (think: “That One” in the debates) and this switch cannot be done without changing the meaning, problems can and do ensue. We count on the relationship between pronoun and antecedent in linguistics. By their nature pronouns can refer to so many things; it is through the relationship to a unique antecedent that the exact shape and definition of a pronoun can be discernible at all. 

With the use of “antecedent” and “referent,” I was not trying to make sweeping comments on the history of SL art, virtual art, or any art all. I was introducing the language of semiotics into this discussion because I think that a look at the “economy of signs” can play an important role in the understanding of what we see at BIW.

A reiteration of my first post: “The art is visual, two-dimensional in a way that not even painting can be–it is projected to its audience through pixels, which are smaller than any paper or canvas. It has no existence outside of this flat reality, so that the image of the art becomes the self-conscious focus.”

I think perhaps this language of semiotics is most interesting because it can be used to describe and understand art in both the virtual and material worlds. As Venturi et. al. used the language of semiotics to put postmodern architecture onto the plane of discussion in the field (in their seminal Learning from Los Vegas), so too I think that an introduction of this language here could be helpful in eliminating the need to separate the “material” and “virtual” art of today.

WHO?

Posted by jvanb on October 22nd, 2008

mystery art
I can’t click on these purple things so i don’t know who did ‘em– they’re cool– who are you mystery artist?

Of (computer) Mice and (RL) Men

Posted by Fitz on October 19th, 2008

In my last post, I began a discussion of my view of the SL art that makes up the BIW project. In sum, it was an apology on the importance of medium. I started to look at how the interplay between the virtual and real worlds is changing the way art can be made, viewed, and understood. In one of the most cogent critiques to this post, amyfreelunch argued that I was ignoring the intent of the unique artist in this view. She praised the importance of content and intent, while I had focused more on the affect of the medium and the form.

A good point to launch this discussion in more focus might be through DanCoyote’s Grapes of Math, now on view at BIW hanging in the air not far from the tower. The Grapes of Math, by DanCoyote

The work is a series of floating purple and pink spheres, dangling off of each other in a formation that recalls a molecular structure. When approaching the piece, a little dialogue immediately pops up on the screen: “CAUTION: Grapes of Math is CUDDLY!” And it is quickly apparent why… the dangling “grapes” drop from their positions in the air to surround the viewer wherever he/she walks.

It is at first glance a structure that mimics the very strict configuration of molecules bound by the laws of physics; it morphs, however, into a structure that doesn’t seem to follow any laws of the material world at all the moment the viewer becomes involved in the piece. When the viewer enters the space, he/she affects the way that the piece hangs moves. What was once still comes to have motion, and what was once symmetrical and physical now bends at the presence of an audience.

This reading would fit well with DanCoyote’s philosophy, as understood through his symbol of “The Sixth Finger” (an image of a hand print with six fingers), which he describes as a symbol of “the computer cursor, or mankind’s intervention into the metaverse.”

The title of the work immediately brings to mind The Grapes of Wrath, a classic in the high school lit canon, which is a story of life and desperation during the Dust Bowl era. Tom Joad arrives back home after being released from prison only to find that his home town has been deserted. He sees a few handbills advertising hope in another land, California, and begins the sunset-chasing trek west in search of hope. Seeing on those roads all the others who have been seduced by the same handbills, he eventually realizes that the promise is not all that it was cut out to be.

(Interestingly, there is also story called the Grapes of Math, which is a spin-off parody that is part of the VeggieTales series. In a parable on forgiveness, a family of moody grapes comes to see the fruitlessness of their curmudgeonly ways, ending with the changing of their name to the “Grapes of Math.”)

DanCoyote’s work, however, seems to have little to do with either of these historical antecedents. In giving it a title that easily calls to mind the stories of the American Canon, and then not talking to that canon at all, I think that DanCoyote is reinforcing exactly my point of the last post: that SL is a land of no antecedents—or, what ultimately amounts to the same thing, a land where antecedents become relative and thus irrelevant.

The only theme maintained is, perhaps, an acceptance of the rejection of nostalgia. The globs are purple like grapes, but there the connection ends. The “math” is perhaps speaking to the molecular structure of the standing work, but this changes the minute that an avatar approaches. In the material world, we need to see in order to believe. But in SL, nothing is as it seems, and the promise of what is seen can always be broken. 

 

BIW - PODCAST 31

Posted by jvanb on October 15th, 2008

you can download it directly here

Or get it from iTunes

and also there is Feedburner

Episode 31:recorded from inside the belly of an alien orbiting pluto

In Episode 31 we are actually talking using the same mic as always at Jack the Pelican but its really hard to hear us. I’m sorry the sound quality is so bad, and i’m not sure what went wrong. I’m really hoping that its not that my mic was damaged in transit from estonia. I hope you can make out what we’re saying. Panel participants include: Scott Kildall of Second Front, Liz Slagus of Eyebeam, and Noreen Leddy of Nobetty.net.